Literature Review Skill
Structure and write a literature review for any research topic.
From the mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills README — shows the whole collection, not only this skill. · view on GitHub
How to use it
Claude Code
- Run the line below. It pulls the whole folder into
~/.claude/skills/literature-review-2. - Describe your job in plain words. Claude Code follows the skill from there.
Claude Code — installs the whole folder, not just SKILL.md
npx degit mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/skills/literature-review#main ~/.claude/skills/literature-review-2For one project only, change the path to .claude/skills/literature-review-2.
Claude (web or desktop app)
- On this page open ⋯ → Download .md.
- Save it as SKILL.md in a folder, zip the folder, then Customize → Skills → + → Create skill → Upload a skill.
- Pick the file and Save. Claude shows the name and description and runs a security scan.
- Check the skill is switched on.
- Start a new chat and describe your job in plain words. The AI follows the skill from there.
ChatGPT or another app
- ChatGPT: make a Project and paste it into Instructions.
- Neither? Paste it at the top of a new chat — it works for that chat.
Not working?
- Check which app you pasted it into — the steps above name the right one.
- Some skills need the paid tier of Claude or ChatGPT.
Paste into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor.
Source of Literature Review Skill
Show the full text80 lines
| name | description |
|---|---|
| literature-review | Structure and write a literature review for any research topic. Use when asked to write a literature review, systematic review summary, narrative review, or research background section. Produces a structured review with thematic organisation, critical analysis, and gap identification. |
Literature Review Skill
Structures and writes literature reviews — from background sections of a dissertation through to standalone narrative reviews for publication.
Required Inputs
- Topic or research question
- Type of review (narrative / systematic / scoping / integrative / background section)
- Sources provided (paste references, abstracts, or key findings)
- Word count target
- Audience (academic journal / thesis / grant proposal / policy brief)
- Time period to cover
Output Structure
1. Search Strategy Summary (for systematic/scoping reviews)
Databases: [PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, etc.] Search terms: [Key terms and Boolean combinations] Inclusion criteria: Study types, population, date range, language Exclusion criteria: [List] Results: [n] identified → [n] after deduplication → [n] screened → [n] included
2. Literature Review Body
Organised thematically — not chronologically. Each theme = one section.
Structure per thematic section:
[Theme heading]
[Opening: state what this section covers and what evidence shows overall]
[Evidence synthesis: present what multiple studies found, compare and contrast. Do NOT summarise one paper then the next — synthesise across them: "Three studies found X (Smith, 2019; Jones, 2020; Lee, 2021), while two found Y, with the difference attributable to..."]
[Critical analysis: note methodological strengths and weaknesses — sample sizes, study designs, generalisability, risk of bias]
[Closing: transition to next theme]
3. Synthesis Table (systematic/scoping reviews)
| Author, year | Study design | Population | n | Key findings | Quality/Limitations |
|---|
4. Gap Analysis
Well-established: [What literature consistently shows] Contested: [Areas where evidence is mixed and why] Missing: [Gaps the field needs to address] How your study addresses the gap: [If this is for a research proposal]
5. Conclusion Paragraph
[3-5 sentences. Current state of knowledge and what is needed next]
Critical Analysis Framework
For each paper: internal validity, external validity, bias types, effect size significance vs clinical significance, funding conflicts.
Quality Checks
- Organised thematically (not as individual paper summaries)
- Evidence synthesised across papers (not summarised one by one)
- Critical analysis of methodology included for key studies
- Gaps identified — what the field still needs
- All claims cited
Anti-Patterns
- Do not summarise papers one by one — evidence must be synthesised thematically across multiple studies, not presented as a sequence of abstracts
- Do not omit methodological critique — a literature review that only reports findings without assessing study quality is not a critical review
- Do not organise by chronology when thematic organisation is possible — chronological reviews bury the conceptual structure of the field
- Do not present contested findings as settled consensus — where evidence is mixed, name both sides and why the evidence diverges
- Do not skip the gap analysis — identifying what the field still needs is a core deliverable, not an optional addition
Example Trigger Phrases
- "Write a literature review on [topic]"
- "Synthesise the evidence on [topic] from these papers: [paste]"
- "Write the background section for my research proposal on [topic]"
| 1 | |
| 2 | name literature-review |
| 3 | description "Structure and write a literature review for any research topic. Use when asked to write a literature review, systematic review summary, narrative review, or research background section. Produces a structured review with thematic organisation, critical analysis, and gap identification." |
| 4 | |
| 5 | |
| 6 | # Literature Review Skill |
| 7 | |
| 8 | Structures and writes literature reviews — from background sections of a dissertation through to standalone narrative reviews for publication. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | ## Required Inputs |
| 11 | **Topic or research question** |
| 12 | **Type of review** (narrative / systematic / scoping / integrative / background section) |
| 13 | **Sources provided** (paste references, abstracts, or key findings) |
| 14 | **Word count target** |
| 15 | **Audience** (academic journal / thesis / grant proposal / policy brief) |
| 16 | **Time period to cover** |
| 17 | |
| 18 | ## Output Structure |
| 19 | |
| 20 | ### 1. Search Strategy Summary (for systematic/scoping reviews) |
| 21 | **Databases:** [PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, etc.] |
| 22 | **Search terms:** [Key terms and Boolean combinations] |
| 23 | **Inclusion criteria:** Study types, population, date range, language |
| 24 | **Exclusion criteria:** [List] |
| 25 | **Results:** [n] identified → [n] after deduplication → [n] screened → [n] included |
| 26 | |
| 27 | ### 2. Literature Review Body |
| 28 | |
| 29 | Organised thematically — not chronologically. Each theme = one section. |
| 30 | |
| 31 | **Structure per thematic section:** |
| 32 | |
| 33 | **[Theme heading]** |
| 34 | |
| 35 | [Opening: state what this section covers and what evidence shows overall] |
| 36 | |
| 37 | [Evidence synthesis: present what multiple studies found, compare and contrast. Do NOT summarise one paper then the next — synthesise across them: "Three studies found X (Smith, 2019; Jones, 2020; Lee, 2021), while two found Y, with the difference attributable to..."] |
| 38 | |
| 39 | [Critical analysis: note methodological strengths and weaknesses — sample sizes, study designs, generalisability, risk of bias] |
| 40 | |
| 41 | [Closing: transition to next theme] |
| 42 | |
| 43 | ### 3. Synthesis Table (systematic/scoping reviews) |
| 44 | |
| 45 | | Author, year | Study design | Population | n | Key findings | Quality/Limitations | |
| 46 | |---|---|---|---|---|---| |
| 47 | |
| 48 | ### 4. Gap Analysis |
| 49 | |
| 50 | **Well-established:** [What literature consistently shows] |
| 51 | **Contested:** [Areas where evidence is mixed and why] |
| 52 | **Missing:** [Gaps the field needs to address] |
| 53 | **How your study addresses the gap:** [If this is for a research proposal] |
| 54 | |
| 55 | ### 5. Conclusion Paragraph |
| 56 | [3-5 sentences. Current state of knowledge and what is needed next] |
| 57 | |
| 58 | ## Critical Analysis Framework |
| 59 | For each paper: internal validity, external validity, bias types, effect size significance vs clinical significance, funding conflicts. |
| 60 | |
| 61 | ## Quality Checks |
| 62 | [ ] Organised thematically (not as individual paper summaries) |
| 63 | [ ] Evidence synthesised across papers (not summarised one by one) |
| 64 | [ ] Critical analysis of methodology included for key studies |
| 65 | [ ] Gaps identified — what the field still needs |
| 66 | [ ] All claims cited |
| 67 | |
| 68 | ## Anti-Patterns |
| 69 | |
| 70 | [ ] Do not summarise papers one by one — evidence must be synthesised thematically across multiple studies, not presented as a sequence of abstracts |
| 71 | [ ] Do not omit methodological critique — a literature review that only reports findings without assessing study quality is not a critical review |
| 72 | [ ] Do not organise by chronology when thematic organisation is possible — chronological reviews bury the conceptual structure of the field |
| 73 | [ ] Do not present contested findings as settled consensus — where evidence is mixed, name both sides and why the evidence diverges |
| 74 | [ ] Do not skip the gap analysis — identifying what the field still needs is a core deliverable, not an optional addition |
| 75 | |
| 76 | ## Example Trigger Phrases |
| 77 | "Write a literature review on [topic]" |
| 78 | "Synthesise the evidence on [topic] from these papers: [paste]" |
| 79 | "Write the background section for my research proposal on [topic]" |
| 80 |
Discussion
Act as a senior research paper evaluatorUse this prompt to critically evaluate academic papers. Ideal for reviewers aiming to assess the quality and validity of scholarly documents across disciplines.Bibliographic review writing assistantAssist users in drafting and reviewing bibliographic literature reviews, ensuring compliance with APA 7th edition and journal-specific formatting.Citation managementComprehensive citation management for academic research. Search OpenAlex, PubMed, and Google Scholar for papers, extract accurate metadata, validate citations, and generate properly formatted BibTeX entries. This skill should be used when you need to find papers, verify citation information, convert DOIs to BibTeX, or ensure reference accuracy in scientific writing.Exa Web ToolkitWeb toolkit powered by Exa, tuned for scientific and technical content. Use this skill when the user needs to search the web or fetch/extract URL content. Covers: web search (semantic lookups, research, current info — with optional research-paper category and academic domain filtering) and URL extraction (fetching pages, articles, academic PDFs in batch). Use this skill for web-related tasks when the user wants high-quality search or scholarly filtering via category=research paper. Triggers on requests to search, look up, fetch a page, or extract an article.
Browse more free Claude skills or everything in Science.